According to the Kuwait Treaty, England guarantees to the Sultan the Asiatic possessions of Turkey for 40 years, that is, it acquires the right, in the event of Russian conquest attempts, to appear again as the protector of Turkey and again to deprive the Russians of their possible acquisitions. In exchange for this, Turkey undertakes to carry out reforms in Armenia, Anatolia, and generally in the Asia Minor regions with a partly Christian population" (pp. 146-147).

"According to the above-cited reports, England guaranteed the integrity of present-day Turkey for 40 years, and this is currently important in relation to Russia, which is conducting subversive work in Armenia," — writes Rohrbach.* (p. 147).

"This creation of a network of communications routes, consisting of railways, waterways, and military roads, shows that Russia does not consider the South Asian question resolved. On the contrary, this systematic construction proves that at an opportune moment the question of who will be the sole ruler of South Asia must be decided by arms" (p. 171).

"Already in 1903 Prince Itō expressed himself in favor of a Russo-Japanese alliance, since such a union would have greatly simplified the partition of the Chinese Empire and would yet have made it possible to satisfy each of the participants" (p. 173).

"The Treaty of July 17/30, 1907 between Russia and Japan points to a new direction in both Russian and Japanese policy. England thus found itself isolated, and the Anglo-Japanese alliance lost considerably in value" (pp. 173-174).

"Soon after the Russo-Japanese agreement, England concluded with Russia a convention of August 7, 1907, according to which Russia temporarily renounced further advancement in Afghanistan" (p. 174).

"The policy of Russo-Japanese rapprochement found its continuation in the treaty of July 4, 1910, which closely resembles a defensive alliance" (p. 219).

* "Münchner Neueste Nachrichten" no. 280, April 4, 1913. Ed.

"This treaty was expanded by a supplementary agreement of May 7, 1911. Both states undertook to mutually respect their respective spheres of interest in Manchuria
658
V. I. LENIN
and to resist any foreign interference. In return, Japan granted Russia complete freedom of action in Mongolia" (p. 220).

"But at this time Russia began to put forward the Mongolian question, to which it had Japanese consent by the treaty of May 7, 1911. On the basis of the revolution and the fact that Chinese emigration policy, wherein peaceful settlers were followed by military detachments, constituted a violation of existing treaties between the Manchus and the Khalka tribes, the Mongolian princes declared the independence of their region. Russia hastened to recognize Mongolian independence, although it in no way contributed to its realization" (pp. 220-221).

"Although, thus, China retained the appearance of supreme authority over Mongolia, nevertheless Russian newspapers are not entirely wrong in asserting that Russia has placed Mongolia under its protectorate. Here the same results have been achieved which Russian diplomacy attained in Korea before 1904. This time Russia, having Japan's approval, may prove more fortunate than then, when it had to struggle against the resistance of that power" (p. 221).

"The only question is whether China can reorganize itself. China represents a compact mass of 300 million people, loving their homeland and not a little embittered by the treatment of foreigners toward their country. In 1911 a revolution began, which ended in the removal of the Manchus. Thus China resolved its first task — the overthrow of foreign rule, which it had so often, but unsuccessfully, attempted to do. Will Yüan Shih-k'ai or someone else become the reformer of China? Once awakened, China will be a more formidable opponent to Russian expansionist policy than Japan, and Prince Ukhtomsky is entirely right in saying: 'China will be reborn through its own forces, as has often happened during many thousands of years of its history; this rebirth will occur more slowly, but perhaps more firmly than in Japan, and then the problem will read: not Russia or Japan, but Russia or China'" (p. 222).

"The guiding principle of Russian Balkans policy in the 19th century was to seek to gain possession of Turkish regions — whether through state-legal inclu-
659